10k OCI filters

[goodtimes]

Originally Posted By: crazyoildude
Im still not sold on the flow though... Im old school and i believe when an oil filter filters better then the flow suffers to some extent. That is why the engine makers oil filters are known here as rock catches...

You should try a Microgreen which has a built in 2 micron bypass filter in the can. I got mine and, NOT made in China. The size I got was made in Mexico, look like by Champ or Clarcor? Has the louvers in the center tube. I don't know what US company has a plant in Mexico these days. Better there than support the other.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: crazyoildude
Im still not sold on the flow though... Im old school and i believe when an oil filter filters better then the flow suffers to some extent. That is why the engine makers oil filters are known here as rock catches...


That's an old "behind the times technology" mentality. Full synthetic media was created for a reason ... that being high efficiency and high flow. Best of both worlds.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: jk_636
You lecture me on mathematics while at the same time claiming that "20.001 is close enough to 20 for all practical purposes"?


It certainly is. Could you tell the difference between a particle that was 20.000 vs 20.001 micron in size?

The answer is no ... and neither can an oil filter on that physical scale of particles.

So the moral of this story is:
Johnny figured it out ... and he didn't even have a calculus class yet.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: Triple_Se7en
Depending upon rounding to significant figures, 20.499 is 20.

Absolutely. Every measurement has error bars, and we have no idea what they are in this case.

 

[ltslimjim]

I am convinced jk_636 is actually a smurf account for ZeeOSix at this point!

Holy moley!

#logic #bestlaughinawhile

 

[Nate1979]

Originally Posted By: jk_636
First of all, it does not stand for "just kidding"

Secondly Motorking would be the least likely person to add beneficial input to this discussion as he is a company representative and would only regurgitate the same marketing info over and over again.

Nothing against motorking but he has an obvious vested interest in the continuity of not only his company, but the marketing techniques they employ. He could not be objective in this discussion.


I was just poking a little fun at your name there.

If you dont believe Motorking then you cant believe the specs on the box of any of the manufacturers.

 

[Garak]

Absolutely. If Motorking is giving us hogwash specifications, then we can't trust any of them. Well, Wix's data is pretty suspect, but I still use them.

In addition to my previous remarks about significant figures and error bars, what would the error bar be on an efficiency specification of a piece of media with a big tear in it?

Mathematically speaking, when the error bar is larger than the measurement itself, the measurement is useless. Correspondingly, if the hole in the media is bigger than the 20 micron particle quoted in the specification, the 20 micron specification is useless.

 

[jk_636]

Originally Posted By: ltslimjim

I am convinced jk_636 is actually a smurf account for ZeeOSix at this point!

Holy moley!

#logic #bestlaughinawhile


What does this mean? I don't follow. I can assure you that zeeosix and I are, in fact, two very different people.
#this used to be called a pound sign

Originally Posted By: Nate1979
Originally Posted By: jk_636
First of all, it does not stand for "just kidding"

Secondly Motorking would be the least likely person to add beneficial input to this discussion as he is a company representative and would only regurgitate the same marketing info over and over again.

Nothing against motorking but he has an obvious vested interest in the continuity of not only his company, but the marketing techniques they employ. He could not be objective in this discussion.


I was just poking a little fun at your name there.

If you dont believe Motorking then you cant believe the specs on the box of any of the manufacturers.


If a Purolator representative was to enroll on this forum would you be inclined to believe his "expert" testimony? I have a feeling we both know the answer to that question.

Hypocrisy is a common occurrence amongst this sub forum I'm afraid.
Originally Posted By: 2010_FX4
Originally Posted By: jk_636
Secondly Motorking would be the least likely person to add beneficial input to this discussion...
But, of course, you are? After all, you have never used the product, so that qualifies you as an expert to objectively slam the FRAM Ultra...right?


Perhaps you should not make assumptions.

I am currently using a Fram Ultra on my truck as an ongoing test between it and my other favorite filters which I believe to be superior. The results of which will be published in an objective write up in about two more months.

So yes, I do have experience with this filter.

 

[CarbonSteel]

Originally Posted By: jk_636
I am currently using a Fram Ultra on my truck as an ongoing test between it and my other favorite filters which I believe to be superior. The results of which will be published in an objective write up in about two more months.
Objective? Time will tell...

 

[jk_636]

I don't receive free filters or kickbacks from any company.

I review products and give opinions strictly as a consumer and a lifelong automotive enthusiast.

I'm not the one to bad mouth a product I have never used.


Originally Posted By: Garak
Absolutely. If Motorking is giving us hogwash specifications, then we can't trust any of them. Well, Wix's data is pretty suspect, but I still use them.

In addition to my previous remarks about significant figures and error bars, what would the error bar be on an efficiency specification of a piece of media with a big tear in it?

Mathematically speaking, when the error bar is larger than the measurement itself, the measurement is useless. Correspondingly, if the hole in the media is bigger than the 20 micron particle quoted in the specification, the 20 micron specification is useless.


It's funny how your only defense is to repetitively bring up these filter tears that mysteriously only happen to certain people under questionable circumstances. I'm still waiting to personally see one of these mythical tears. I am 99.9% certain I never will. There is your error bar.

You want to talk about hogwash? Wix filters have never had questionable efficiency. That is hogwash. Fram is the only one I know of that hides behind an efficiency rating that is mysteriously located somewhere >X on all their filters (not just the synthetic)

At least Purolator is confident enough in their products that they will give you an ISO verified efficiency rating @X microns.

 

[KCJeep]

Originally Posted By: jk_636
First of all, it does not stand for "just kidding"

Secondly Motorking would be the least likely person to add beneficial input to this discussion as he is a company representative and would only regurgitate the same marketing info over and over again.

Nothing against motorking but he has an obvious vested interest in the continuity of not only his company, but the marketing techniques they employ. He could not be objective in this discussion.


Oh the irony....

Have a great day.

 

[tratman2000]

Originally Posted By: KCJeep

First of all, it does not stand for "just kidding"

Secondly Motorking would be the least likely person to add beneficial input to this discussion as he is a company representative and would only regurgitate the same marketing info over and over again.

Nothing against motorking but he has an obvious vested interest in the continuity of not only his company, but the marketing techniques they employ. He could not be objective in this discussion. [/quote

Oh the irony....

Have a great day.


I'd like to take a poll. Does anyone take what jk_636 says seriously or does everybody agree he's full of it. He obviously has an agenda here against Fram by pushing Purolator products down our throat and being oblivious to the on going issues they have.

 

[goodtimes]

Originally Posted By: tratman2000
Originally Posted By: KCJeep

First of all, it does not stand for "just kidding"

Secondly Motorking would be the least likely person to add beneficial input to this discussion as he is a company representative and would only regurgitate the same marketing info over and over again.

Nothing against motorking but he has an obvious vested interest in the continuity of not only his company, but the marketing techniques they employ. He could not be objective in this discussion. [/quote

Oh the irony....

Have a great day.


I'd like to take a poll. Does anyone take what jk_636 says seriously or does everybody agree he's full of it. He obviously has an agenda here against Fram by pushing Purolator products down our throat and being oblivious to the on going issues they have.


He said he is running a Fram Ultra now and will be showing the test results in a couple of months. What kind of test results is anyone's guess. Plenty of cut open ones already. Maybe he is surprised someone read that. Some people can't move away from what they thought was true and learn. I saw the pictures of the tearing, learned, and am happy I did.

 

[jk_636]

Originally Posted By: tratman2000
Originally Posted By: KCJeep

First of all, it does not stand for "just kidding"

Secondly Motorking would be the least likely person to add beneficial input to this discussion as he is a company representative and would only regurgitate the same marketing info over and over again.

Nothing against motorking but he has an obvious vested interest in the continuity of not only his company, but the marketing techniques they employ. He could not be objective in this discussion. [/quote

Oh the irony....

Have a great day.


I'd like to take a poll. Does anyone take what jk_636 says seriously or does everybody agree he's full of it. He obviously has an agenda here against Fram by pushing Purolator products down our throat and being oblivious to the on going issues they have.


Ah yes, more personal attacks. Straight out of the Frampire playbook.

Nothung could be farther from the truth. I don't push Purolator on anyone. I don't push anything on anyone. I contribute to threads with my opinion and include substantiating evidence that justifies my position.

All I do is continually prove that Purolator is still a quality filter. dont believe me? Take a look at any of my filters posted here. Case closed.

Oh and one more thing, I am one of the few dedicated members who refuses to bow down to the Frampire nation and continue to show that there are actually more and in some cases better options out there besides the Fram ultra. These acts of defiance have undoubtedly made me less than popular amongst the Frampires and their leadership.

The only agenda here is the one perpetuated by those who won't stop until everyone uses the ultra and those that don't conform are either belittled, banned or chased off of this forum by continual harassment.

Hopefully one day this forum will get back on track, and members will respect each other and engage in productive discourse. That was what brought myself and many more members to this site in the first place.

 

[jk_636]

Originally Posted By: goodtimes
Originally Posted By: tratman2000
Originally Posted By: KCJeep

First of all, it does not stand for "just kidding"

Secondly Motorking would be the least likely person to add beneficial input to this discussion as he is a company representative and would only regurgitate the same marketing info over and over again.

Nothing against motorking but he has an obvious vested interest in the continuity of not only his company, but the marketing techniques they employ. He could not be objective in this discussion. [/quote

Oh the irony....

Have a great day.


I'd like to take a poll. Does anyone take what jk_636 says seriously or does everybody agree he's full of it. He obviously has an agenda here against Fram by pushing Purolator products down our throat and being oblivious to the on going issues they have.


He said he is running a Fram Ultra now and will be showing the test results in a couple of months. What kind of test results is anyone's guess. Plenty of cut open ones already. Maybe he is surprised someone read that. Some people can't move away from what they thought was true and learn. I saw the pictures of the tearing, learned, and am happy I did.


If that was a sincere comment, I would be more than happy to tell you what the report will focus on.

I will be using one Royal Purple, Purolator synthetic and Fram ultra, all with the same mileage, oil weight and operating conditions.

I will then cut and post pictures of new filters side by side with the used ones and will evaluate what most people would consider critical components of the filter. It will compare and contrast the can thicknesses, adbv pliabilities, media pleats, size, area and uniformity and strength after use.

It will be full of detailed photos and will conclude with my personal opinion on which filter I found to be preferable and why. My goal is to create an article that could be the go to resource for those wanting to see for their own eyes the differences between the current top 3 synthetic oil files.

 

[tratman2000]

Originally Posted By: jk_636
Originally Posted By: tratman2000
Originally Posted By: KCJeep

First of all, it does not stand for "just kidding"

Secondly Motorking would be the least likely person to add beneficial input to this discussion as he is a company representative and would only regurgitate the same marketing info over and over again.

Nothing against motorking but he has an obvious vested interest in the continuity of not only his company, but the marketing techniques they employ. He could not be objective in this discussion. [/quote

Oh the irony....

Have a great day.


I'd like to take a poll. Does anyone take what jk_636 says seriously or does everybody agree he's full of it. He obviously has an agenda here against Fram by pushing Purolator products down our throat and being oblivious to the on going issues they have.


Ah yes, more personal attacks. Straight out of the Frampire playbook.

Nothung could be farther from the truth. I don't push Purolator on anyone. I don't push anything on anyone. I contribute to threads with my opinion and include substantiating evidence that justifies my position.

All I do is continually prove that Purolator is still a quality filter. dont believe me? Take a look at any of my filters posted here. Case closed.

Oh and one more thing, I am one of the few dedicated members who refuses to bow down to the Frampire nation and continue to show that there are actually more and in some cases better options out there besides the Fram ultra. These acts of defiance have undoubtedly made me less than popular amongst the Frampires and their leadership.

The only agenda here is the one perpetuated by those who won't stop until everyone uses the ultra and those that don't conform are either belittled, banned or chased off of this forum by continual harassment.

Hopefully one day this forum will get back on track, and members will respect each other and engage in productive discourse. That was what brought myself and many more members to this site in the first place.


Personal attacks seriously you're the one that dragged in motoring and question his authenticity he's done nothing but answered questions when needed never once tried to push a product like you and also you keep talking about the Purolator pics you posted but I've only seen one how about throw up all the links to the pics you post a bet it's not as many is the failed pics that are on here. If you want people to take you seriously back off a little post accurate pics that you took and didn't Google on the Internet and let the pics prove themselves otherwise you are just beating a dead horse

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: jk_636
I don't receive free filters or kickbacks from any company.

I do, and I've admitted it here before. I used to receive free Hastings from a local oil change place. Now, I was offered free Valvoline (Purolator construction, I believe) after they switched filter suppliers. I liked and used Hastings before I ever got a free one, and I lost faith in Purolator before I got a free one.

Originally Posted By: jk_636
It's funny how your only defense is to repetitively bring up these filter tears that mysteriously only happen to certain people under questionable circumstances. I'm still waiting to personally see one of these mythical tears. I am 99.9% certain I never will. There is your error bar.

99.9% is a high level of certainty. There is nothing terribly mysterious about these filter tears, other than, perhaps, the root cause. And there is nothing questionable about the circumstances, either, other than, again, the root cause.

Originally Posted By: jk_636
You want to talk about hogwash? Wix filters have never had questionable efficiency. That is hogwash. Fram is the only one I know of that hides behind an efficiency rating that is mysteriously located somewhere >X on all their filters (not just the synthetic)

Dave Newton and I have discussed this a lot in the past. Wix filters ratings have all changed on their website to every filter having identical efficiency, when we know that wasn't the case before. That's where the data has become suspect. However, the product certainly is not suspect. Motorcraft used to publish abysmally low efficiencies for their filters, and they were shown to be significantly better than what was claimed by Ford.

Originally Posted By: jk_636
At least Purolator is confident enough in their products that they will give you an ISO verified efficiency rating @X microns.

This is Fram's wording:

Quote:
FRAM Group testing of average filter efficiency and dirt holding capacity using FRAM XG3387A, XG8A, and XG4967 and their leading economy filter model equivalents under ISO 4548-12 for particles > 20 microns.

I would assume (and I'm not going to pay to purchase the standard) that the standard indicates what particle sizes are to be used in the test. Fram gives a result just like Purolator does.

Originally Posted By: jk_636
The only agenda here is the one perpetuated by those who won't stop until everyone uses the ultra and those that don't conform are either belittled, banned or chased off of this forum by continual harassment.

That's odd. I've used a lot of Purolator made oil filters over the years, yet never a Fram oil filter, much less a Fram Ultra. I even moved away from Fram air filters to Wix air filters over the last couple years because the latter was in stock in town and the former needed a special order.

 

[CarbonSteel]

Originally Posted By: jk_636
All I do is continually prove that Purolator is still a quality filter. dont believe me? Take a look at any of my filters posted here. Case closed.
I was not aware that your filter not tearing negates all of the ones that have. I stand corrected.

Originally Posted By: jk_636
Oh and one more thing, I am one of the few dedicated members who refuses to bow down to the Frampire nation and continue to show that there are actually more and in some cases better options out there besides the Fram ultra.
Really? Do tell what filter FOR THE MONEY is better than a FRAM Ultra and contains the same quality of construction?

 

[IveBeenRued]

jk_636, how did you determine that the Fram Ultra, RP, and Purolator Synthetic are in the same class? If I had to rank some of the top filters out there at this time I would do it as such (note: not an extensive list):

Fram Ultra rated at 20 micron @ 99% efficiency for 15K miles.
Amsoil EA rated at 20 micron @ 98.7 efficiency for 15-25K miles.
Mobil 1 rated at 25 micron @ 99.9% efficiency for 15K miles.
Purolator Synthetic rated at 25 micron @ 99% efficiency for 10K miles
Royal Purple rated at 25 micron @ 99% efficiency for an undetermined service interval

So if it were me and I wanted to test the top 3 oil filters I would personally drop the Royal Purple and the Purolator Synthetic because they are both outperformed by at least the Fram Ultra, Amsoil EA, and Mobil 1 oil filters.

 

[jk_636]

Quote:

Personal attacks seriously you're the one that dragged in motoring and question his authenticity he's done nothing but answered questions when needed never once tried to push a product like you and also you keep talking about the Purolator pics you posted but I've only seen one how about throw up all the links to the pics you post a bet it's not as many is the failed pics that are on here. If you want people to take you seriously back off a little post accurate pics that you took and didn't Google on the Internet and let the pics prove themselves otherwise you are just beating a dead horse


Yes personal attacks have unfortunately become the status quo from Fram "enthusiasts". Sad really.

And how dare someone question the comments and disposition of the representative of a company that has unclear claims of efficiency that lend themselves open to scrutiny. I'm sure that if the roles were reversed and he was a representative of Mann-Hummel or Purolator you would blindly accept whatever they said as unbiased truth. I am certain they would receive nothing but the same unwavering support that you show for your local Fram rep right?

The sarcasm was obviousoy implied. Perhaps this is why Purolator never responds to the hate mail that is sent to them eh?

I have no problem reposting the pictures...again...but only because it reinforces the truth behind the issue at hand.

As for the number as they relate to those that are "torn", of course they will be less. I am a relatively new member to the forum, but the number is irrelevant, as the legitimacy of these "torn" filters are still up for debate.